delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f |
Date: | 29 Sep 2003 08:04:34 +0200 |
Message-Id: | <u65jci0zx.fsf@elta.co.il> |
From: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il> |
To: | Kbwms AT aol DOT com |
CC: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk |
In-reply-to: | <12e.322be914.2ca8a773@aol.com> (Kbwms@aol.com) |
Subject: | Re: Integrating K. B. Williams's maths functions |
References: | <12e DOT 322be914 DOT 2ca8a773 AT aol DOT com> |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> From: Kbwms AT aol DOT com > Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 17:06:59 EDT > > > > I think when these functions are part of libc.a, we should remove the > > ones in libm.a. > > The point is that neither library has a nan() function that meets C99 > specifications -- namely that the C99 functions take a calling-sequence > parameter whereas the current ones to not. What should we do about that? I thought Richard wrote a version of `nan' that does suppport C99's semantics.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |